Skip to main content
Menu Icon
Close

InfoBytes Blog

Financial Services Law Insights and Observations

Filter

Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.

  • CFPB and DOJ Reach $24 Million Settlement with Indirect Auto Lender to Resolve Discriminatory Pricing Allegations

    Consumer Finance

    On July 14, the CFPB and DOJ announced a $24 million settlement with an indirect auto lender to resolve allegations that the lender offered higher interest rates to minority borrowers compared to white borrowers with a similar credit risk profile. Specifically, both agencies contended that the lender allowed their partnering dealers excessive discretion to increase the lender’s base interest rate with a “dealer markup” on auto loan contracts, which resulted in discriminatory pricing. Under terms of the settlement, the lender agreed to, among other things, (i) pay $24 million in restitution to affected borrowers, (ii) impose dealer markup rate caps on auto loans, and (iii) improve its policies and procedures related to auto loan pricing and compensation program. Notably, the Bureau did not impose a civil money penalty due to the lender’s responsible conduct. The Bureau filed its consent order in an administrative enforcement action. In a separate announcement, the DOJ filed its complaint and consent order in federal court, which will require judicial approval.  The lender was represented in the matter by BuckleySandler.

    CFPB Auto Finance DOJ Enforcement Discrimination

  • FIFA Investigation Update: First FIFA Official Extradited to United States

    Federal Issues

    On July 15, after 50 days of detention, a high-ranking FIFA official widely reported to be former FIFA Vice President Jeffrey Webb was extradited from Switzerland to the United States. Webb ultimately agreed to be extradited despite initially contesting his extradition at a hearing following his arrest. Six other FIFA officials arrested in connection with DOJ’S corruption investigation are continuing to fight extradition. The Swiss Federal Office of Justice is overseeing the extradition proceedings.

    All seven officials were formally indicted by the DOJ on May 27.

    Previous BuckleySandler coverage of this investigation can be found here

    FCPA DOJ

  • LBI Enters Into DPA and Former Executives Plead Guilty to Resolve DOJ FCPA Investigation

    Federal Issues

    On July 17, the DOJ announced that Louis Berger International Inc. (“LBI”) had agreed to enter into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement to resolve the DOJ’s FCPA investigation into the New Jersey-based construction management company’s operations in India, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Kuwait.  LBI also agreed to pay a $17.1 criminal penalty.  LBI admitted that it bribed foreign officials to secure government construction management contracts around the world.  According to the company’s admissions regarding a conspiracy to violate the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA, from 1998 to 2010, LBI concealed $3.9 million in corrupt payments through various methods, including (i) using inflated and fictitious invoices that were used for the payments of bribes through intermediaries, and (ii) paying fictitious “commitment fees,” “counterpart per diems,” “marketing fees,” and “field operation expenses.”

    Under the terms of the DPA, the DOJ will defer criminal prosecution of LBI for a period of three years and the company will retain an independent compliance monitor for three years.  In addition, Richard Hirsch of the Philippines and James McClung of the United Arab Emirates, both former executives of LBI, each pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to violate the FCPA and one substantive count of violating the FCPA.  They are scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 5, 2015. Continuing its recent trend, the DOJ emphasized the company’s self-disclosure and cooperation, as well as remediation efforts.

    FCPA DOJ

  • Ninth Circuit Bars Qui Tam Relator's Whistleblower Recovery in False Claims Act Suit Over Conviction

    Courts

    On July 16, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a qui tam relator from a False Claims Act suit, holding that the False Claims Act requires dismissal of a relator convicted of any conduct giving rise to the fraud at issue, however minor, and prevents the relator from collecting any share of a whistleblower award.  United States ex rel. Schroeder v. CH2M Hill, No. 13-35479 (9th Cir. July 16, 2015).  The relator submitted false time cards while working for a contractor who engaged in fraudulent billing practices.  The Ninth Circuit held that the False Claims Act permits reducing relator awards for planners and initiators of the subject fraud, but dismisses and does not permit collection by all “relators convicted of criminal conduct arising from the fraudulent conduct at issue in the qui tam suit,” even those that did not plan or initiate the fraud.  Congress’s hierarchy for relator awards, reasoned the court, “may satisfy other values, such as the deterrent effect of preventing criminally culpable individuals from gaining from their conduct, and the investigatory benefits of actions brought by planners and initiators who often have greater knowledge about co-conspirators and the scope of a fraudulent scheme.”  The court rejected the idea that the statute “contain[s] an exception for minor participants” who were nonetheless convicted of the subject criminal conduct.

     

    False Claims Act / FIRREA

  • Department of Labor Guidance Clarifies Classification of Employees Under Fair Labor Standards Act

    Consumer Finance

    On July 15, the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor (DOL) issued guidance to employers in determining whether a worker should be classified as an employee or independent contractor under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  The Guidance first noted the “problematic trend” in misclassifying workers as independent contractors and the potential adverse effects of such misclassification, including the loss of workplace protections such as minimum wage, overtime compensation, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation, as well as the loss of tax revenues and the creation of an uneven playing field for employers.  Beginning with the expansive FLSA definition of “employ” and applying a detailed six factor “economic realities” test, rather than a narrower common law control test, the Guidance concludes that most workers are employees under the FLSA’s broad definitions.

    Agency Rule-Making & Guidance

  • Special Alert: CFPB Launches First Monthly Complaint Report Providing Snapshot of Consumer Trends

    Consumer Finance

    On July 16, 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB” or “Bureau”) launched the first in a new series of monthly complaint reports highlighting key trends from consumer complaints submitted to the CFPB. Importantly, its monthly report provides significant detail on the complaints the CFPB has received, including the names of the companies that received the largest number of complaints.

    Currently, the most-complained-about companies are also the largest bank and nonbank financial institutions in the country. Since these institutions have the highest numbers of customers, it is only natural that they have received the highest number of complaints. On the same day as the monthly report’s release, CFPB Director Richard Cordray provided remarks at an Americans for Financial Reform event in Washington, D.C. Director Cordray noted that in future monthly reports, the CFPB hopes to “normalize” its consumer complaint data by accounting for financial institutions’ respective size and volume. To that end, the CFPB issued a Request for Information seeking input on ways to enable the public to more easily understand company-level complaint information and make comparisons. The comment period closes August 31, 2015.

    The report also provides data on complaint volume, state and local complaint information, and trends relating to specific consumer financial products or services. In June 2015, for example, debt collection was the most-complained-about product or service with the 32% of complaints filed with the Bureau, while complaints relating to mortgages and credit reporting were next in line.

    Going forward, each monthly report will spotlight a particular financial product and geographic area. In the first report, the CFPB closely examines debt collection complaints and complaints from consumers in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

    The CFPB began accepting complaints in July 2011 and launched its Consumer Complaint Database in June 2012, which is the nation’s largest public collection of consumer financial complaints. As of July 1, 2015, the CFPB has handled 650,700 complaints.

    In its press release for the monthly report, the Bureau issued a reminder that it expects companies to respond to CFPB complaints within 15 days. The Bureau also expects companies to describe the steps they have taken or intend to take to resolve each consumer complaint. In fact, in its monthly report, the Bureau provided statistics on how often certain debt collection companies were “untimely” in responding to complaints.

    Notably, the CFPB stressed that complaints inform the Bureau’s work and can directly feed into its supervision and enforcement prioritization process. “Consumer complaints are the CFPB’s compass and play a central role in everything we do. They help us identify and prioritize problems for potential action,” said CFPB Director Cordray. The publication of this monthly report, together with continuing consumer complaint initiatives from the CFPB, highlights the critical importance of developing an effective complaint management program.

    * * *

    Questions regarding the matters discussed in this Alert may be directed to any of our lawyers listed below, or to any other BuckleySandler attorney with whom you have consulted in the past.

    CFPB Nonbank Supervision Consumer Complaints Bank Supervision

  • Treasury Deputy Secretary Raskin Delivers Remarks on Cybersecurity in the Financial Sector

    Privacy, Cyber Risk & Data Security

    On July 14, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Sarah Bloom Raskin delivered remarks at the American Bankers Association Summer Leadership meeting in Baltimore. Speaking on cybersecurity and cyber-resiliency in banking and the financial sector generally, Raskin’s remarks continued her December 2014 remarks in Austin at the Executive Leadership Cybersecurity Conference regarding three main areas, including (i) baseline protections, (ii) information sharing, and (iii) response recovery. According to Raskin, since December the growing number of cyberattacks – including against health insurers and the federal government’s Office of Personnel Management – has made the government and public more mindful of the serious threat posed by cyberattacks. Accordingly, cybersecurity has seen a “profoundly positive cultural change,” moving beyond just the purview of IT specialists. Deputy Secretary Raskin’s most recent remarks added 10 follow-up questions for banks and financial entities to consider, including whether cybersecurity is incorporated into the bank’s governance systems, security controls are tailored to specific cyber risks presented (as opposed to a “one-size fits all” approach), enhanced controls are implemented and adequate training provided, and basic “cyber hygiene” practices (including multi-factor authentication) are followed.  Raskin also emphasized the need to appropriately tailor cyber risk insurance.

    Privacy/Cyber Risk & Data Security Department of Treasury Cyber Insurance

  • New York AG Schneiderman Settles with Auto Dealers Over Alleged Deceptive Auto Advertising

    Consumer Finance

    On July 14, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced two settlements with auto dealers over allegedly deceptive advertising practices. The first settlement was reached with a White Plains-based auto dealer that allegedly misled consumers by promoting, in its print and online ads, illusory sale and lease prices by including “discounts or rebates that were not available to most consumers, and thus, did not represent the actual sale or lease prices.” According to the Attorney General, rebates or discounts offered to “military” or “college graduates” were among the deceptive advertisements used by the auto dealer. An investigation by the AG’s Office revealed that the dealership would only make the rebates or discounts available to certain military personnel and recent college graduates. In addition to failing to comply with the Attorney General’s Advertising Guidelines for Automobile Dealers, the Attorney General alleged that the ads used footnotes and asterisks that contradicted or materially modified the principal message of the advertisements. The dealership will pay $32,500 to the state and has agreed to reform its advertising practices.

    In a separate action, the Attorney General announced a settlement resolving allegations that 22 dealerships “persistently defrauded consumers with misleading promotions and fraudulent sales tactics.” According to the Attorney General’s office, the dealers’ advertisements included certain game cards that led consumers to believe that they would be guaranteed winners of certain items – such as cash, a free vehicle, or an Apple iPad – if they received a winning ticket containing three matching symbols. However, virtually none of the consumers won a prize when they brought in their winning tickets to the dealers. In addition to misleading game cards, the dealers were alleged to have charged unauthorized fees for vehicle maintenance plans that had not been requested by purchasers and to have upcharged the retail sales price on cars to effectively nullify discounts offered to consumers. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the dealers will pay $310,000 in penalties and restitution.

    Auto Finance Enforcement

  • DC Circuit Bars Retroactive Application of Dodd-Frank Act Provisions Permitting SEC to Bar Association with Municipal Advisors and Rating Organizations

    Securities

    On July 14, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that Dodd-Frank Act provisions authorizing the SEC to punish certain misconduct by barring association with municipal advisors and rating organizations may not be applied with respect to misconduct that took place prior to the effective date of the provisions. Koch et al. v. SEC, No. 14-1134 (D.C. Cir. Jul. 14, 2015). The Koch appeal arose from an SEC finding that the defendants had violated the securities laws by engaging in a market manipulation practice known as “marking the close,” and the SEC’s imposition of sanctions that, among others, prohibiting Koch from associating with municipal advisors and rating organizations. The DC Circuit upheld the finding of violations, but vacated the part of the order barring Koch from associating with municipal advisors and rating organizations on the basis the relevant Dodd-Frank provisions authorizing that sanction had not been enacted at the time of the misconduct. The court determined that applying those provisions was impermissibly retroactive, as there was no showing that Congress intended the provisions to apply retroactively and because it triggered additional legal consequences not existing at the time of the misconduct. The court did not disturb the other remedial orders in the case, including bars to association with other securities industries.

    Dodd-Frank SEC Credit Rating Agencies

  • OFAC Publishes Venezuela Sanctions Regulations

    Federal Issues

    On July 10, OFAC published regulations to implement the Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014 and Executive Order 13692. The Act required the President to impose targeted sanctions on certain persons determined to be responsible for significant acts of violence or serious human rights abuses against antigovernment protesters in Venezuela, and to have ordered, or otherwise directed, the arrest or prosecution of certain persons in Venezuela. The Executive Order set forth standards for designating and suspending entry into the United States of corresponding persons in Venezuela. The regulations provide the framework for blocking property or interests in property of persons designated according to the Executive Order. According to OFAC, the regulations are currently in “abbreviated form” and the agency will issue a more comprehensive set of regulations that may provide further interpretive guidance, general licenses, and statements of licensing policy.

    Sanctions OFAC

Pages

Upcoming Events